Who Needs Planned Parenthood??

[Soggy in NOLA]

No doubt you find the most extreme, perverted line of thinking rational. More proof, as if we needed more, that you are mentally ill.

Rational thought is rational thought. There's nothing perverted about it. In a nutshell, a week-old puppy is far more aware of his world than a 20-week old fetus.

Rational thought sans morality produces the Holocause, eugenics, and abortion on demand.


Only after eugenics became entrenched in the United States was the campaign transplanted into Germany, in no small measure through the efforts of California eugenicists, who published booklets idealizing sterilization and circulated them to German official and scientists.

Hitler studied American eugenics laws. He tried to legitimize his anti-Semitism by medicalizing it, and wrapping it in the more palatable pseudoscientific facade of eugenics. Hitler was able to recruit more followers among reasonable Germans by claiming that science was on his side. While Hitler's race hatred sprung from his own mind, the intellectual outlines of the eugenics Hitler adopted in 1924 were made in America.

During the '20s, Carnegie Institution eugenic scientists cultivated deep personal and professional relationships with Germany's fascist eugenicists. InMein Kampf, published in 1924, Hitler quoted American eugenic ideology and openly displayed a thorough knowledge of American eugenics. "There is today one state," wrote Hitler, "in which at least weak beginnings toward a better conception [of immigration] are noticeable. Of course, it is not our model German Republic, but the United States."

Hitler proudly told his comrades just how closely he followed the progress of the American eugenics movement. "I have studied with great interest," he told a fellow Nazi, "the laws of several American states concerning prevention of reproduction by people whose progeny would, in all probability, be of no value or be injurious to the racial stock."
- See more at: The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics

1. Hitler wrote to the president of the American Eugenics Society to ask for a copy of his“The Case for Sterilization.” (Margaret Sanger and Sterilization) German race science stood on American progressive’s shoulders.

Margaret Sanger believed that women should have some control over their bodies when it came to reproduction,

that's all.

It's ghoulish, but not surprising, that you believe otherwise.

Women have complete control... some just choose not to exercise said control. Murdering unborn children is what's ghoulish.

Complete control? Not the last time I checked.

What ever you deranged psychopath...

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Wow... gotta love the left... infanticide, gay marriage, sodomy.. just a laundry list of all things disgusting.

Gotta love the right-wingers like you, and your total inability to think rationally about complicated issues.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Could you explain the reasoning that you used to come to that ridiculous conclusion?

Fetus

Person

Time and tides change the rules...

For the Left.....killing of either is fine.

1. President Obama appointed Professor Peter Singer as his heathcare advisor.
   Peter Singer Joins Obama's Health Care Administrators : I Am Not a Fan of Peter Singer Story & Experience

"I Am Not a Fan of Peter Singer"


a. "Singer once wrote, "because people are human does not mean that their lives are more valuable than animals."He not only advocates abortion but also killing disabled babies up to 28 days after they are born.In his book "Practical Ethics," he wrote, "When the death of a disabled infant will lead to the birth of another infant with better prospects of a happy life, the total amount of happiness will be greater if the disabled infant is killed....Killing a disabled infant is not morally equivalent to killing a person.Often, it is not wrong at all."
Peter Singer, "Practical Ethics," Cambridge University Press, 1979, p. 191.


b. Perhaps this is why you would not excoriate the following:
"Police say they're questioning the mother of a newborn baby girl - her umbilical cord still attached - found dead outside a Bronx apartment building.

No arrests have been made.

According to the New York City Police Department, the infant was thrown out a seventh-floor apartment building window with the umbilical cord still attached just after 3:30 p.m. The building is on West 183rd Street near Loring Place North in Morris Heights."
Newborn baby with umbilical cord attached dies after being tossed from window in Bronx

You're losing it.

Killing post birth babies, and 3rd trimester fetuses, is not the position of pro choicers.

You're just making up lies, because you're hysterical

"Killing post birth babies, and 3rd trimester fetuses, is not the position of pro choicers."

Of course it is.

You elected a President who was copacetic with allowing a baby born.....born....as a result of a botched abortion to die unattended.
That's called infanticide.

And....I never lie.

Okay, you're drunk then.

Show me anyone in the pro choice movement, who has said it's okay to kill a baby after it's born.

And do you expect anyone to believe...Obama wants post birth babies to die?

Do you know how unbalanced that is?......get help woman.

1. "Show me anyone in the pro choice movement, who has said it's okay to kill a baby after it's born."
Barack Obama's vetted choice for science adviser...Peter Singer
Singer writes, in Rethinking Life and Death:

Human babies are not born self-aware or capable of grasping their lives over time. They are not persons. Hence their lives would seem to be no more worthy of protection that the life of a fetus.


Singer advocates thekilling of certain newborn infants at the discretion of their parents.The criteria he proposes for deciding which infants may be killed center on a wide range of hereditary physical conditions which Singer considers “disabilities”. ... “We think that some infants with severe disabilities should be killed.”

What counts as a “severe disability” for Singer? He intentionally leaves the term vague to allow for a broad range of parental discretion,...
Peter Singer and Eugenics | Institute for Social Ecology



2. "And do you expect anyone to believe...Obama wants post birth babies to die?"
Now pay attention....I'm going to jam those words down your throat:

a. "Newt Gingrich deflected a question ...by pointing out thatObama voted in favor of a law that protected abortion providersduring his term as state senator of Illinois
"You did not once during the 2008 campaign ask whyBarack Obama voted in favor of legalizing infanticide,"Gingrich said. "If we're going to debate about who is the extremist on this issues, it is President Obama, who, as a state senator, voted to protect doctors who killed babies."
Newt Gingrich Calls Obama An 'Extremist' Who Supported 'Infanticide' At GOP Debate


I n·fan·ti·cide/inˈfantiˌsīd/
Noun:
The practice in some societies of killing unwanted children soon after birth.


b. "Gingrich was presumably referencing Obama’s opposition to Illinois’ proposed version of a “born alive” law,intended to require doctors to administer immediate medical care to any infant that survived an intended abortion....FactCheck.org found holes in Obama’s explanations as to why he did not support the “born alive” legislation..."
FACT CHECK: Gingrich Claim on Obama Infanticide Vote A Stretch - Naureen Khan - NationalJournal.com

c. "Obama voted in committee against the 2003 state bill that was nearly identical to the federal act he says he would have supported.Both contained identical clauses saying that nothing in the bills could be construed to affect legal rights of an unborn fetus, according to an undisputed summary written immediately after the committee’s 2003 mark-up session."
FactCheck.org : Obama and ‘Infanticide’

4. If a child is 'accidentally' born alive as a result of a botched abortion attempt, Senator Obama had no problem allowing that newborn to die, sans any medical attention.






Pay special attention to the vid @ :50

2:01

2:40

3:55

5:28


Should I await your apology?

 

[Thunderbird]

It's a philosophical position that says ending the life of a late-term fetus is really no different than ending the life of a neonate. If you would have aborted a Down's fetus, had you known, what difference does it make if it is born or not born? Either way, you want a different baby and the difference is only the matter of a degree. To most that is infanticide, but it's actually common sense. In the past a woman would have just left the baby out in the snow to die. The same if they had too many mouths to feed.

So infanticide is just "common sense". Glad we got that clear.

If killing an innocent baby isn't wrong, what is?

 

[Coyote]

Fetus

Person

Time and tides change the rules...

For the Left.....killing of either is fine.

1. President Obama appointed Professor Peter Singer as his heathcare advisor.
   Peter Singer Joins Obama's Health Care Administrators : I Am Not a Fan of Peter Singer Story & Experience

"I Am Not a Fan of Peter Singer"


a. "Singer once wrote, "because people are human does not mean that their lives are more valuable than animals."He not only advocates abortion but also killing disabled babies up to 28 days after they are born.In his book "Practical Ethics," he wrote, "When the death of a disabled infant will lead to the birth of another infant with better prospects of a happy life, the total amount of happiness will be greater if the disabled infant is killed....Killing a disabled infant is not morally equivalent to killing a person.Often, it is not wrong at all."
Peter Singer, "Practical Ethics," Cambridge University Press, 1979, p. 191.


b. Perhaps this is why you would not excoriate the following:
"Police say they're questioning the mother of a newborn baby girl - her umbilical cord still attached - found dead outside a Bronx apartment building.

No arrests have been made.

According to the New York City Police Department, the infant was thrown out a seventh-floor apartment building window with the umbilical cord still attached just after 3:30 p.m. The building is on West 183rd Street near Loring Place North in Morris Heights."
Newborn baby with umbilical cord attached dies after being tossed from window in Bronx

Singer is rational, and he can following a line of reasoning end to end, hence why you reject his reasoning.

No doubt you find the most extreme, perverted line of thinking rational. More proof, as if we needed more, that you are mentally ill.

Rational thought is rational thought. There's nothing perverted about it. In a nutshell, a week-old puppy is far more aware of his world than a 20-week old fetus.

Rational thought sans morality produces the Holocause, eugenics, and abortion on demand.


Only after eugenics became entrenched in the United States was the campaign transplanted into Germany, in no small measure through the efforts of California eugenicists, who published booklets idealizing sterilization and circulated them to German official and scientists.

Hitler studied American eugenics laws. He tried to legitimize his anti-Semitism by medicalizing it, and wrapping it in the more palatable pseudoscientific facade of eugenics. Hitler was able to recruit more followers among reasonable Germans by claiming that science was on his side. While Hitler's race hatred sprung from his own mind, the intellectual outlines of the eugenics Hitler adopted in 1924 were made in America.

During the '20s, Carnegie Institution eugenic scientists cultivated deep personal and professional relationships with Germany's fascist eugenicists. InMein Kampf, published in 1924, Hitler quoted American eugenic ideology and openly displayed a thorough knowledge of American eugenics. "There is today one state," wrote Hitler, "in which at least weak beginnings toward a better conception [of immigration] are noticeable. Of course, it is not our model German Republic, but the United States."

Hitler proudly told his comrades just how closely he followed the progress of the American eugenics movement. "I have studied with great interest," he told a fellow Nazi, "the laws of several American states concerning prevention of reproduction by people whose progeny would, in all probability, be of no value or be injurious to the racial stock."
- See more at: The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics

1. Hitler wrote to the president of the American Eugenics Society to ask for a copy of his“The Case for Sterilization.” (Margaret Sanger and Sterilization) German race science stood on American progressive’s shoulders.

That's all very interesting but where is the evidence showing Sangor admired or associated with Hitler in any way? The only actual documentation I can find states the oppposite of what you claim.

Eugenics was a widespread movement in Europe and America at the time which led deeply damaging practices such as forced sterilization of the poor or "promiscious" (something only ended fairly recently) by a society that was equally blithe in recommending medicinal lobotomies. Hitler represented it's most extreme end.

 

[Coyote]

Singer is rational, and he can following a line of reasoning end to end, hence why you reject his reasoning.

No doubt you find the most extreme, perverted line of thinking rational. More proof, as if we needed more, that you are mentally ill.

Rational thought is rational thought. There's nothing perverted about it. In a nutshell, a week-old puppy is far more aware of his world than a 20-week old fetus.

Rational thought sans morality produces the Holocause, eugenics, and abortion on demand.


Only after eugenics became entrenched in the United States was the campaign transplanted into Germany, in no small measure through the efforts of California eugenicists, who published booklets idealizing sterilization and circulated them to German official and scientists.

Hitler studied American eugenics laws. He tried to legitimize his anti-Semitism by medicalizing it, and wrapping it in the more palatable pseudoscientific facade of eugenics. Hitler was able to recruit more followers among reasonable Germans by claiming that science was on his side. While Hitler's race hatred sprung from his own mind, the intellectual outlines of the eugenics Hitler adopted in 1924 were made in America.

During the '20s, Carnegie Institution eugenic scientists cultivated deep personal and professional relationships with Germany's fascist eugenicists. InMein Kampf, published in 1924, Hitler quoted American eugenic ideology and openly displayed a thorough knowledge of American eugenics. "There is today one state," wrote Hitler, "in which at least weak beginnings toward a better conception [of immigration] are noticeable. Of course, it is not our model German Republic, but the United States."

Hitler proudly told his comrades just how closely he followed the progress of the American eugenics movement. "I have studied with great interest," he told a fellow Nazi, "the laws of several American states concerning prevention of reproduction by people whose progeny would, in all probability, be of no value or be injurious to the racial stock."
- See more at: The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics

1. Hitler wrote to the president of the American Eugenics Society to ask for a copy of his“The Case for Sterilization.” (Margaret Sanger and Sterilization) German race science stood on American progressive’s shoulders.

Margaret Sanger believed that women should have some control over their bodies when it came to reproduction,

that's all.

It's ghoulish, but not surprising, that you believe otherwise.

Women have complete control... some just choose not to exercise said control. Murdering unborn children is what's ghoulish.

Then step up and put your body where your mouth is - adopt a fetus and implant it

 

[PaintMyHouse]

It's a philosophical position that says ending the life of a late-term fetus is really no different than ending the life of a neonate. If you would have aborted a Down's fetus, had you known, what difference does it make if it is born or not born? Either way, you want a different baby and the difference is only the matter of a degree. To most that is infanticide, but it's actually common sense. In the past a woman would have just left the baby out in the snow to die. The same if they had too many mouths to feed.

So infanticide is just "common sense". Glad we got that clear.

If killing an innocent baby isn't wrong, what is?

A lot of things, and we're not talking about a happy and healthy neonate, but a suffering and profoundly damaged one, which we need like a hole in the head. That one might, all by itself, keep a dozen healthy infants from being born because of all the time and resources they'd suck up. That's not Pro-Life, far from it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Until you guys learn to be realistic about human sexuality and reproduction just shut up about PP. Your dislike of them is ignorant and moronic, and so is your view that fetuses are people. They aren't, obviously.

Fetuses are living human beings at an early stage of development. They require oxygen to survive, so that makes them living. They are composed of human DNA so that makes them human.
What evidence do you have that makes them NOT living human beings?
Talking points?
Oh yeah...and by the way....I am pro choice.

It doesn't matter if they're living, because bacteria is living.

What matters is...in what phase of fetal development does a fetus begin to have sensations. Without a cerebral cortex, there cannot be self awareness, emotions, awareness of pain, memories, or any of the brain acitvity that post birth humans have. There is a reason you don't remember being a fetus. Your brain was not developed to the point where you could experience anything

Pro lifers are trying to manipulate parental instincts, which are irrational by neccessity, to assert that 1st and 2nd trimester fetuses are "babies". Because that term helps legitimize their unsound hysterical reactions to the termination of fetus.

Never, on any issue in my lifetime, have I seen the type of hysterical reasoning pro lifers are engaging in. One may have to go as far back as Scopes Monkey, or Salem.

Bacteria is not composed of human DNA...I noticed you ignored that part..

So......a fetus requires oxygen to live.....a fetus is composed of human DNA...

So a fetus is a human life at the early stage of development.

Because a human fetus at the early stage of development does NOT have sensations is a contributing factor to my position as a pro choicer.

But it does not mean that a living being composed of human DNA is not a living human being.

And by the way....drop the arrogant tone.....Pro lifers referring to first and second trimester fetuses as babies is no different than pro choicers, such as yourself, denying that a fetus who is composed of human dna and requires oxygen to live is not a human living being.

Look in the mirror.

Then why won't you support laws that will put women in prison for life for having abortions?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Fetus

Person

Time and tides change the rules...

For the Left.....killing of either is fine.

1. President Obama appointed Professor Peter Singer as his heathcare advisor.
   Peter Singer Joins Obama's Health Care Administrators : I Am Not a Fan of Peter Singer Story & Experience

"I Am Not a Fan of Peter Singer"


a. "Singer once wrote, "because people are human does not mean that their lives are more valuable than animals."He not only advocates abortion but also killing disabled babies up to 28 days after they are born.In his book "Practical Ethics," he wrote, "When the death of a disabled infant will lead to the birth of another infant with better prospects of a happy life, the total amount of happiness will be greater if the disabled infant is killed....Killing a disabled infant is not morally equivalent to killing a person.Often, it is not wrong at all."
Peter Singer, "Practical Ethics," Cambridge University Press, 1979, p. 191.


b. Perhaps this is why you would not excoriate the following:
"Police say they're questioning the mother of a newborn baby girl - her umbilical cord still attached - found dead outside a Bronx apartment building.

No arrests have been made.

According to the New York City Police Department, the infant was thrown out a seventh-floor apartment building window with the umbilical cord still attached just after 3:30 p.m. The building is on West 183rd Street near Loring Place North in Morris Heights."
Newborn baby with umbilical cord attached dies after being tossed from window in Bronx

You're losing it.

Killing post birth babies, and 3rd trimester fetuses, is not the position of pro choicers.

You're just making up lies, because you're hysterical

"Killing post birth babies, and 3rd trimester fetuses, is not the position of pro choicers."

Of course it is.

You elected a President who was copacetic with allowing a baby born.....born....as a result of a botched abortion to die unattended.
That's called infanticide.

And....I never lie.

Okay, you're drunk then.

Show me anyone in the pro choice movement, who has said it's okay to kill a baby after it's born.

And do you expect anyone to believe...Obama wants post birth babies to die?

Do you know how unbalanced that is?......get help woman.

1. "Show me anyone in the pro choice movement, who has said it's okay to kill a baby after it's born."
Barack Obama's vetted choice for science adviser...Peter Singer
Singer writes, in Rethinking Life and Death:

Human babies are not born self-aware or capable of grasping their lives over time. They are not persons. Hence their lives would seem to be no more worthy of protection that the life of a fetus.


Singer advocates thekilling of certain newborn infants at the discretion of their parents.The criteria he proposes for deciding which infants may be killed center on a wide range of hereditary physical conditions which Singer considers “disabilities”. ... “We think that some infants with severe disabilities should be killed.”

What counts as a “severe disability” for Singer? He intentionally leaves the term vague to allow for a broad range of parental discretion,...
Peter Singer and Eugenics | Institute for Social Ecology



2. "And do you expect anyone to believe...Obama wants post birth babies to die?"
Now pay attention....I'm going to jam those words down your throat:

a. "Newt Gingrich deflected a question ...by pointing out thatObama voted in favor of a law that protected abortion providersduring his term as state senator of Illinois
"You did not once during the 2008 campaign ask whyBarack Obama voted in favor of legalizing infanticide,"Gingrich said. "If we're going to debate about who is the extremist on this issues, it is President Obama, who, as a state senator, voted to protect doctors who killed babies."
Newt Gingrich Calls Obama An 'Extremist' Who Supported 'Infanticide' At GOP Debate


I n·fan·ti·cide/inˈfantiˌsīd/
Noun:
The practice in some societies of killing unwanted children soon after birth.


b. "Gingrich was presumably referencing Obama’s opposition to Illinois’ proposed version of a “born alive” law,intended to require doctors to administer immediate medical care to any infant that survived an intended abortion....FactCheck.org found holes in Obama’s explanations as to why he did not support the “born alive” legislation..."
FACT CHECK: Gingrich Claim on Obama Infanticide Vote A Stretch - Naureen Khan - NationalJournal.com

c. "Obama voted in committee against the 2003 state bill that was nearly identical to the federal act he says he would have supported.Both contained identical clauses saying that nothing in the bills could be construed to affect legal rights of an unborn fetus, according to an undisputed summary written immediately after the committee’s 2003 mark-up session."
FactCheck.org : Obama and ‘Infanticide’

4. If a child is 'accidentally' born alive as a result of a botched abortion attempt, Senator Obama had no problem allowing that newborn to die, sans any medical attention.






Pay special attention to the vid @ :50

2:01

2:40

3:55

5:28


Should I await your apology?

Then why won't you support life in prison for women who have abortions?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Singer is rational, and he can following a line of reasoning end to end, hence why you reject his reasoning.

No doubt you find the most extreme, perverted line of thinking rational. More proof, as if we needed more, that you are mentally ill.

Rational thought is rational thought. There's nothing perverted about it. In a nutshell, a week-old puppy is far more aware of his world than a 20-week old fetus.

Rational thought sans morality produces the Holocause, eugenics, and abortion on demand.


Only after eugenics became entrenched in the United States was the campaign transplanted into Germany, in no small measure through the efforts of California eugenicists, who published booklets idealizing sterilization and circulated them to German official and scientists.

Hitler studied American eugenics laws. He tried to legitimize his anti-Semitism by medicalizing it, and wrapping it in the more palatable pseudoscientific facade of eugenics. Hitler was able to recruit more followers among reasonable Germans by claiming that science was on his side. While Hitler's race hatred sprung from his own mind, the intellectual outlines of the eugenics Hitler adopted in 1924 were made in America.

During the '20s, Carnegie Institution eugenic scientists cultivated deep personal and professional relationships with Germany's fascist eugenicists. InMein Kampf, published in 1924, Hitler quoted American eugenic ideology and openly displayed a thorough knowledge of American eugenics. "There is today one state," wrote Hitler, "in which at least weak beginnings toward a better conception [of immigration] are noticeable. Of course, it is not our model German Republic, but the United States."

Hitler proudly told his comrades just how closely he followed the progress of the American eugenics movement. "I have studied with great interest," he told a fellow Nazi, "the laws of several American states concerning prevention of reproduction by people whose progeny would, in all probability, be of no value or be injurious to the racial stock."
- See more at: The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics

1. Hitler wrote to the president of the American Eugenics Society to ask for a copy of his“The Case for Sterilization.” (Margaret Sanger and Sterilization) German race science stood on American progressive’s shoulders.

Margaret Sanger believed that women should have some control over their bodies when it came to reproduction,

that's all.

It's ghoulish, but not surprising, that you believe otherwise.

Women have complete control... some just choose not to exercise said control. Murdering unborn children is what's ghoulish.

Then why won't you support life in prison for women who have abortions?

 

[Coyote]

For the Left.....killing of either is fine.

1. President Obama appointed Professor Peter Singer as his heathcare advisor.
   Peter Singer Joins Obama's Health Care Administrators : I Am Not a Fan of Peter Singer Story & Experience

"I Am Not a Fan of Peter Singer"


a. "Singer once wrote, "because people are human does not mean that their lives are more valuable than animals."He not only advocates abortion but also killing disabled babies up to 28 days after they are born.In his book "Practical Ethics," he wrote, "When the death of a disabled infant will lead to the birth of another infant with better prospects of a happy life, the total amount of happiness will be greater if the disabled infant is killed....Killing a disabled infant is not morally equivalent to killing a person.Often, it is not wrong at all."
Peter Singer, "Practical Ethics," Cambridge University Press, 1979, p. 191.


b. Perhaps this is why you would not excoriate the following:
"Police say they're questioning the mother of a newborn baby girl - her umbilical cord still attached - found dead outside a Bronx apartment building.

No arrests have been made.

According to the New York City Police Department, the infant was thrown out a seventh-floor apartment building window with the umbilical cord still attached just after 3:30 p.m. The building is on West 183rd Street near Loring Place North in Morris Heights."
Newborn baby with umbilical cord attached dies after being tossed from window in Bronx

Singer is rational, and he can following a line of reasoning end to end, hence why you reject his reasoning.

No doubt you find the most extreme, perverted line of thinking rational. More proof, as if we needed more, that you are mentally ill.

Rational thought is rational thought. There's nothing perverted about it. In a nutshell, a week-old puppy is far more aware of his world than a 20-week old fetus.

Rational thought sans morality produces the Holocause, eugenics, and abortion on demand.


Only after eugenics became entrenched in the United States was the campaign transplanted into Germany, in no small measure through the efforts of California eugenicists, who published booklets idealizing sterilization and circulated them to German official and scientists.

Hitler studied American eugenics laws. He tried to legitimize his anti-Semitism by medicalizing it, and wrapping it in the more palatable pseudoscientific facade of eugenics. Hitler was able to recruit more followers among reasonable Germans by claiming that science was on his side. While Hitler's race hatred sprung from his own mind, the intellectual outlines of the eugenics Hitler adopted in 1924 were made in America.

During the '20s, Carnegie Institution eugenic scientists cultivated deep personal and professional relationships with Germany's fascist eugenicists. InMein Kampf, published in 1924, Hitler quoted American eugenic ideology and openly displayed a thorough knowledge of American eugenics. "There is today one state," wrote Hitler, "in which at least weak beginnings toward a better conception [of immigration] are noticeable. Of course, it is not our model German Republic, but the United States."

Hitler proudly told his comrades just how closely he followed the progress of the American eugenics movement. "I have studied with great interest," he told a fellow Nazi, "the laws of several American states concerning prevention of reproduction by people whose progeny would, in all probability, be of no value or be injurious to the racial stock."
- See more at: The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics

1. Hitler wrote to the president of the American Eugenics Society to ask for a copy of his“The Case for Sterilization.” (Margaret Sanger and Sterilization) German race science stood on American progressive’s shoulders.

Margaret Sanger believed that women should have some control over their bodies when it came to reproduction,

that's all.

It's ghoulish, but not surprising, that you believe otherwise.

She witnessed first hand the degradation and misery that poverty and uncontrolled pregnancies had on a family and on a woman's body, and how it prevented them from ever getting out of poverty. These people are so whacked out in their hatred of her because they've conflated her with the abortion movement, which she had nothing to do with. She was about legalization and access to birth control for all women, and especially poor women.

I guess the question is - why do these rightwingnuts want to prevent poor women from getting birth control?

 

[Jarhead]

Until you guys learn to be realistic about human sexuality and reproduction just shut up about PP. Your dislike of them is ignorant and moronic, and so is your view that fetuses are people. They aren't, obviously.

Fetuses are living human beings at an early stage of development. They require oxygen to survive, so that makes them living. They are composed of human DNA so that makes them human.
What evidence do you have that makes them NOT living human beings?
Talking points?
Oh yeah...and by the way....I am pro choice.

If you are Pro-Choice then you should learn biology. That's ain't it.

Fuck off moron.

You are the king of talking points and no substance on this board.

Go away until you have more to offer than "you are wrong"....

 

[Thunderbird]

Then why won't you support laws that will put women in prison for life for having abortions?

Women are the victims of the abortion industry.

Misinformation and Manipulation at Planned Parenthood - Live Action

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Until you guys learn to be realistic about human sexuality and reproduction just shut up about PP. Your dislike of them is ignorant and moronic, and so is your view that fetuses are people. They aren't, obviously.

Fetuses are living human beings at an early stage of development. They require oxygen to survive, so that makes them living. They are composed of human DNA so that makes them human.
What evidence do you have that makes them NOT living human beings?
Talking points?
Oh yeah...and by the way....I am pro choice.

If you are Pro-Choice then you should learn biology. That's ain't it.

Fuck off moron.

You are the king of talking points and no substance on this board.

Go away until you have more to offer than "you are wrong"....

Start here: Multicellular Life Found That Doesn't Need Oxygen

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards on Tuesday for the first time directly addressed members of Congress about undercover videos purporting to show that the women's health organization illegally sells fetal tissue for profit, telling members .

Video allegations are 'offensive' and 'untrue'

 

[toxicmedia]

Until you guys learn to be realistic about human sexuality and reproduction just shut up about PP. Your dislike of them is ignorant and moronic, and so is your view that fetuses are people. They aren't, obviously.

Fetuses are living human beings at an early stage of development. They require oxygen to survive, so that makes them living. They are composed of human DNA so that makes them human.
What evidence do you have that makes them NOT living human beings?
Talking points?
Oh yeah...and by the way....I am pro choice.

It doesn't matter if they're living, because bacteria is living.

What matters is...in what phase of fetal development does a fetus begin to have sensations. Without a cerebral cortex, there cannot be self awareness, emotions, awareness of pain, memories, or any of the brain acitvity that post birth humans have. There is a reason you don't remember being a fetus. Your brain was not developed to the point where you could experience anything

Pro lifers are trying to manipulate parental instincts, which are irrational by neccessity, to assert that 1st and 2nd trimester fetuses are "babies". Because that term helps legitimize their unsound hysterical reactions to the termination of fetus.

Never, on any issue in my lifetime, have I seen the type of hysterical reasoning pro lifers are engaging in. One may have to go as far back as Scopes Monkey, or Salem.

Bacteria is not composed of human DNA...I noticed you ignored that part..

So......a fetus requires oxygen to live.....a fetus is composed of human DNA...

So a fetus is a human life at the early stage of development.

Because a human fetus at the early stage of development does NOT have sensations is a contributing factor to my position as a pro choicer.

But it does not mean that a living being composed of human DNA is not a living human being.

And by the way....drop the arrogant tone.....Pro lifers referring to first and second trimester fetuses as babies is no different than pro choicers, such as yourself, denying that a fetus who is composed of human dna and requires oxygen to live is not a human living being.

Look in the mirror.

A fetus is a human life at the early stage of development, and the stage in which they do have a developed cerebral cortex, is the 3rd trimester, and Roe V Wade held abortion should not be legal during that trimester with exceptions.

All the emotional blackmal you can muster won't change that.

At that point, all you have left is hsyterics

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Then why won't you support laws that will put women in prison for life for having abortions?

Women are the victims of the abortion industry.

Misinformation and Manipulation at Planned Parenthood - Live Action

Women are just stupid eh? Good to know...

 

[toxicmedia]

For the Left.....killing of either is fine.

1. President Obama appointed Professor Peter Singer as his heathcare advisor.
   Peter Singer Joins Obama's Health Care Administrators : I Am Not a Fan of Peter Singer Story & Experience

"I Am Not a Fan of Peter Singer"


a. "Singer once wrote, "because people are human does not mean that their lives are more valuable than animals."He not only advocates abortion but also killing disabled babies up to 28 days after they are born.In his book "Practical Ethics," he wrote, "When the death of a disabled infant will lead to the birth of another infant with better prospects of a happy life, the total amount of happiness will be greater if the disabled infant is killed....Killing a disabled infant is not morally equivalent to killing a person.Often, it is not wrong at all."
Peter Singer, "Practical Ethics," Cambridge University Press, 1979, p. 191.


b. Perhaps this is why you would not excoriate the following:
"Police say they're questioning the mother of a newborn baby girl - her umbilical cord still attached - found dead outside a Bronx apartment building.

No arrests have been made.

According to the New York City Police Department, the infant was thrown out a seventh-floor apartment building window with the umbilical cord still attached just after 3:30 p.m. The building is on West 183rd Street near Loring Place North in Morris Heights."
Newborn baby with umbilical cord attached dies after being tossed from window in Bronx

You're losing it.

Killing post birth babies, and 3rd trimester fetuses, is not the position of pro choicers.

You're just making up lies, because you're hysterical

"Killing post birth babies, and 3rd trimester fetuses, is not the position of pro choicers."

Of course it is.

You elected a President who was copacetic with allowing a baby born.....born....as a result of a botched abortion to die unattended.
That's called infanticide.

And....I never lie.

Okay, you're drunk then.

Show me anyone in the pro choice movement, who has said it's okay to kill a baby after it's born.

And do you expect anyone to believe...Obama wants post birth babies to die?

Do you know how unbalanced that is?......get help woman.

1. "Show me anyone in the pro choice movement, who has said it's okay to kill a baby after it's born."
Barack Obama's vetted choice for science adviser...Peter Singer
Singer writes, in Rethinking Life and Death:

Human babies are not born self-aware or capable of grasping their lives over time. They are not persons. Hence their lives would seem to be no more worthy of protection that the life of a fetus.


Singer advocates thekilling of certain newborn infants at the discretion of their parents.The criteria he proposes for deciding which infants may be killed center on a wide range of hereditary physical conditions which Singer considers “disabilities”. ... “We think that some infants with severe disabilities should be killed.”

What counts as a “severe disability” for Singer? He intentionally leaves the term vague to allow for a broad range of parental discretion,...
Peter Singer and Eugenics | Institute for Social Ecology



2. "And do you expect anyone to believe...Obama wants post birth babies to die?"
Now pay attention....I'm going to jam those words down your throat:

a. "Newt Gingrich deflected a question ...by pointing out thatObama voted in favor of a law that protected abortion providersduring his term as state senator of Illinois
"You did not once during the 2008 campaign ask whyBarack Obama voted in favor of legalizing infanticide,"Gingrich said. "If we're going to debate about who is the extremist on this issues, it is President Obama, who, as a state senator, voted to protect doctors who killed babies."
Newt Gingrich Calls Obama An 'Extremist' Who Supported 'Infanticide' At GOP Debate


I n·fan·ti·cide/inˈfantiˌsīd/
Noun:
The practice in some societies of killing unwanted children soon after birth.


b. "Gingrich was presumably referencing Obama’s opposition to Illinois’ proposed version of a “born alive” law,intended to require doctors to administer immediate medical care to any infant that survived an intended abortion....FactCheck.org found holes in Obama’s explanations as to why he did not support the “born alive” legislation..."
FACT CHECK: Gingrich Claim on Obama Infanticide Vote A Stretch - Naureen Khan - NationalJournal.com

c. "Obama voted in committee against the 2003 state bill that was nearly identical to the federal act he says he would have supported.Both contained identical clauses saying that nothing in the bills could be construed to affect legal rights of an unborn fetus, according to an undisputed summary written immediately after the committee’s 2003 mark-up session."
FactCheck.org : Obama and ‘Infanticide’

4. If a child is 'accidentally' born alive as a result of a botched abortion attempt, Senator Obama had no problem allowing that newborn to die, sans any medical attention.






Pay special attention to the vid @ :50

2:01

2:40

3:55

5:28


Should I await your apology?

Then why won't you support life in prison for women who have abortions?

That was just so adorable.

Did you see how PC was waiting for your apology?

 

[Thunderbird]

Then why won't you support laws that will put women in prison for life for having abortions?

Women are the victims of the abortion industry.

Misinformation and Manipulation at Planned Parenthood - Live Action

Women are just stupid eh? Good to know...

Being lied to doesn't make you stupid.

The abortion industry and women: 160 Million and Counting

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Then why won't you support laws that will put women in prison for life for having abortions?

Women are the victims of the abortion industry.

Misinformation and Manipulation at Planned Parenthood - Live Action

Women are just stupid eh? Good to know...

Being lied to doesn't make you stupid.

The abortion industry and women: 160 Million and Counting

So, women aren't smart enough to know that they want to abort? Obviously you are not female, and don't know women well.